Save yourself heartburn. Logic isn't part of BCS equation

I'm a little surprised the sports media are getting so worked up over some of the hideous BCS bowl selections.

And not just because it distracts from the mandated national agenda of honing and burnishing the Tim Tebow chronicles.

C'mon, scribes, bloggers and talking haircuts. Get back to work on what America really thinks is important.

The bowls aren't worth getting bent out of shape over. Except for The Big One, we're talking exhibition games.

Their purpose? To make money for the host organizations and to entertain idle America.

Outside of the SEC intramural match-up between LSU and Alabama, critics of the bowl selection process might as well be debating the merits of NFL preseason-game scheduling.

Not that there weren't some curious - maybe even outrageous - developments. Nevermind a BCS slot, what does once-beaten, No. 7 Boise State have to do to earn a post-Christmas bowl?

Kellen Moore, the winningest quarterback in college football history who has performed brilliantly in victories over highly-ranked, heavyweight programs, deserves a better valediction than the Maaco Bowl on Dec. 22 against 6-6 Arizona State.

I don't get that. Nobody does. It's harder to fathom why Boise State was left out of a BCS bowl than why Virginia Tech received an at-large bid.

Forgetting how well or not Boise State fans "travel," the Broncos would have made an excellent TV attraction pitted against a more imposing opponent on a bigger stage.

But as I said, it's best to not get worked up over this and instead try to find the humor in some of the nonsensical bowl selections.

Take the Gator Bowl - Florida vs. Ohio State, both 6-6. Big names. Puny records.

When presidential candidates stumble as badly as Florida and Ohio State have, they slink out of the race. Failing college football teams beat the drums, fire up the alumni and pack for a bowl trip.

It's a great racket. Notice the excitement expressed by coaches and fans over bowl invitations, even to games nobody but hard-core alumni and correctional facility inmates have any intention of watching. This is why there is no national playoff.

Instead, fans and media get to debate the relative merits of meaningless games. It's the hype and arguments, not the actual competition, that get the juices flowing. Talking is more fun and less time-consuming than watching when the games finally get here.

One of the debates du jour is whether Virginia Tech and Michigan have any business playing in the Sugar Bowl.

Arguing in the affirmative, Frank Beamer came out with guns blazing Monday, saying that Tech had no reason to apologize. He's right. Maybe the Sugar Bowl should apologize, but not Tech.

On the other hand, Tech wouldn't be such a large target if the two-loss Hokies could lay claim to a single victory over a team ranked in the final BCS top 25.

The Orange Bowl pairing of Clemson and West Virginia is no prize, either, and could produce record-low TV ratings for what once was a premier event.

A lesser bowl - the Alamo - is more worth watching because of Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III, and though they each have two losses, it's hard to imagine Oregon and Wisconsin not putting on an entertaining show in the Rose Bowl on Jan. 2.

But if I had to pick just one game to watch - even over the BCS title match - it would be the Fiesta Bowl between Stanford and Oklahoma State on Jan. 2, a dual featuring arguably the best teams outside the SEC elite, led by pro-style quarterbacks Andrew Luck and Brandon Weeden.

I'll be in front of a TV for that one, pretending not to be watching an exhibition game.

Bob Molinaro, (757) 446-2373, bob.molinaro@pilotonline.com